The Official September 2016 Study Group - WAKE ME UP WHEN SEPTEMBER ENDS Forum

[Mikey]

Just mindlessly played video games for a bit and then did a timed LR section. Well, I'm pretty sure I went at least -4 on this one, my mind was racing all over the place, blehh. Will BR in a bit.

[Alexandros]

So, I have no conception of time whatsoever. It's past 7pm and I want pad thai. I guess I should do this PT anyways but blergh.

Good call. That's what I'm doing. Thai food.

PINEAPPLE RICE - peace out SBUX.

Yeah, screw it. Thai food time. Whether or not I do something vaguely resembling a PT this evening is to be determined...

I'm so addicted to this place's take-out tofu pad thai it's terrible.

[Mikey]

PT 42
LR 2: -3 (34:32)

My timing could have been slightly better if I didn't go back and forth with one of the easier questions. Also, WOW, I was iffy on 4 questions which I went to BR only those 4 and it ends up being that I got them all right. BUT the 3 I got wrong were ones I completely thought I got right, wtf lol

[34iplaw]

PT 42
LR 2: -3 (34:32)

My timing could have been slightly better if I didn't go back and forth with one of the easier questions. Also, WOW, I was iffy on 4 questions which I went to BR only those 4 and it ends up being that I got them all right. BUT the 3 I got wrong were ones I completely thought I got right, wtf lol

I guess that is sort of lucky but also sucks?

Consider them all wrong for the reasons of prep!

[20170322]

So ready to get turnt and watch the RNC

[34iplaw]

So ready to get turnt and watch the RNC

Let's all apply to Cooley with 170+ and get "MAKE COOLEY GREAT AGAIN" hats.

[Mikey]

PT 42
LR 2: -3 (34:32)

My timing could have been slightly better if I didn't go back and forth with one of the easier questions. Also, WOW, I was iffy on 4 questions which I went to BR only those 4 and it ends up being that I got them all right. BUT the 3 I got wrong were ones I completely thought I got right, wtf lol

I guess that is sort of lucky but also sucks?

Consider them all wrong for the reasons of prep!

Nah, a -7 on a single LR section would fuck my confidence. -3 Lmao I'll accept defeat though! But yeah I'm going to go over the 3 I got wrong now, I already went over the 4 I was iffy on. On one of the questions that I got wrong, I was between A and E (chose E but answer was A), and at the time the wording of A made absolutely no sense to me so I got rid of it.

To be fair, I was partially off focus, and idk if it had anything to do with mindlessly playing video games literally minutes before lmao. Maybe a warm up next time would do me good.

[Mikey]

So ready to get turnt and watch the RNC

Let's all apply to Cooley with 170+ and get "MAKE COOLEY GREAT AGAIN" hats.

Omg hahahahaha

[20170322]

So ready to get turnt and watch the RNC

Let's all apply to Cooley with 170+ and get "MAKE COOLEY GREAT AGAIN" hats.

Trump is the human equivalent of Cooley. Clinton is the human equivalent of Yale. Berkley is Jill Stein. UVA is Gary Johnson.

[legallyadog]

I'm having a tough time with #26 from PT 60 Section 4 (RC). It's the contingency fee passage.

[+] Spoiler

It's super easy to narrow it down to C and D which are stated in the pasage as the two conditions that must be satisfied for the contingency fee to apply to the case. I just don't know how to successfully eliminate C. Please help!

[20170322]

I'm having a tough time with #26 from PT 60 Section 4 (RC). It's the contingency fee passage.

[+] Spoiler

It's super easy to narrow it down to C and D which are stated in the pasage as the two conditions that must be satisfied for the contingency fee to apply to the case. I just don't know how to successfully eliminate C. Please help!

Can u include the choices to jog our memories?

[Alexandros]

So ready to get turnt and watch the RNC

Let's all apply to Cooley with 170+ and get "MAKE COOLEY GREAT AGAIN" hats.

Trump is the human equivalent of Cooley. Clinton is the human equivalent of Yale. Berkley is Jill Stein. UVA is Gary Johnson.

SweetTort's got it figured out.

[Replitz]

None of my friends are taking this test so I'm going to share here.

Diagnostic was 163 on PT 40 exactly one month ago.

This week, I took PTs 29-31 during downtimes at work. I work on a political campaign and sometimes it's a joke so I have lots of free time for stuff like this. I scored 176, 177, 172 in that order. I was worried that I wouldn't be able to replicate those scores since I had already drilled the LGs for those tests, although the LR and RC were new. I also was taking breaks, and being a little generous with time since there were lots of distractions from my co-workers.

Today I took my first timed PT (41) under test conditions (answer sheet, printed out exam) since starting a serious study regiment. I log in a spreadsheet every session, currently at ~65 hours of prep, mostly logic games drilling on PTs 29-40.

I entered my score into 7sage and got a 168, was disappointed but not surprised. Totally tanked the first two sections, LR1 and LG but went -0 on sextion 3, LR2 and -1 on section 4, RC.

Only after starting blind review did I notice I missed entering about 10 questions into 7sage on sections one and two, and one question on section 4. I ended up with a 175 and couldn't be happier, given that I'm taking the test in September.

What's even better is that 5/6 questions I missed were on a single Logic game that was really unusual and fucked me up. I had no trouble getting every question right during Blind Review, and if I had not messed up on that game I would have scored 180 with only one question off on LR1.

I was expecting a far worse result after drinking heavily last night and this being my second attmept under test conditions. But I'm super excited now knowing my test is still more than 2 months away.

[appind]

anyone try Manhattan fake logic games?

they seem hard as eff

just barely finished one in 15 min

[legallyadog]

I'm having a tough time with #26 from PT 60 Section 4 (RC). It's the contingency fee passage.

[+] Spoiler

It's super easy to narrow it down to C and D which are stated in the pasage as the two conditions that must be satisfied for the contingency fee to apply to the case. I just don't know how to successfully eliminate C. Please help!

Can u include the choices to jog our memories?

I literally just figured it out ugh. If you're still curious though...

[+] Spoiler

LRCWA's reports recommended that contingency fee agreements
A. be used only when that such arrangements will increase lawyers' diligence and commitment to their cases
B. be used only in cases in which clients are unlikely to be awarded enormous damages
C. be used if the lawyer is not certain that the client could pay the lawyer's fees if the suit was unsuccessful
D. not be used if there is another arrangement that is practical
E. not be used except in cases the lawyer is reasonably sure that the client will win damages much larger to cover the fees.

In the passage, the requirement is actually that the lawyer "must be satisfied" that the client can't pay if they don't win, which C doesn't match because the lawyer is only "not certain."

[Mikey]

None of my friends are taking this test so I'm going to share here.

Diagnostic was 163 on PT 40 exactly one month ago.

This week, I took PTs 29-31 during downtimes at work. I work on a political campaign and sometimes it's a joke so I have lots of free time for stuff like this. I scored 176, 177, 172 in that order. I was worried that I wouldn't be able to replicate those scores since I had already drilled the LGs for those tests, although the LR and RC were new. I also was taking breaks, and being a little generous with time since there were lots of distractions from my co-workers.

Today I took my first timed PT (41) under test conditions (answer sheet, printed out exam) since starting a serious study regiment. I log in a spreadsheet every session, currently at ~65 hours of prep, mostly logic games drilling on PTs 29-40.

I entered my score into 7sage and got a 168, was disappointed but not surprised. Totally tanked the first two sections, LR1 and LG but went -0 on sextion 3, LR2 and -1 on section 4, RC.

Only after starting blind review did I notice I missed entering about 10 questions into 7sage on sections one and two, and one question on section 4. I ended up with a 175 and couldn't be happier, given that I'm taking the test in September.

What's even better is that 5/6 questions I missed were on a single Logic game that was really unusual and fucked me up. I had no trouble getting every question right during Blind Review, and if I had not messed up on that game I would have scored 180 with only one question off on LR1.

I was expecting a far worse result after drinking heavily last night and this being my second attmept under test conditions. But I'm super excited now knowing my test is still more than 2 months away.

Just one month of studying? Nice! You're one of the blessed ones, I hate/admire you at the same time. As I was reading, I was going to mention that a 168 for someone who took a diagnostic a month ago really isn't that bad, but then I saw the inputting error thing and then the 175, haha.

[Barack O'Drama]

None of my friends are taking this test so I'm going to share here.

Diagnostic was 163 on PT 40 exactly one month ago.

This week, I took PTs 29-31 during downtimes at work. I work on a political campaign and sometimes it's a joke so I have lots of free time for stuff like this. I scored 176, 177, 172 in that order. I was worried that I wouldn't be able to replicate those scores since I had already drilled the LGs for those tests, although the LR and RC were new. I also was taking breaks, and being a little generous with time since there were lots of distractions from my co-workers.

Today I took my first timed PT (41) under test conditions (answer sheet, printed out exam) since starting a serious study regiment. I log in a spreadsheet every session, currently at ~65 hours of prep, mostly logic games drilling on PTs 29-40.

I entered my score into 7sage and got a 168, was disappointed but not surprised. Totally tanked the first two sections, LR1 and LG but went -0 on sextion 3, LR2 and -1 on section 4, RC.

Only after starting blind review did I notice I missed entering about 10 questions into 7sage on sections one and two, and one question on section 4. I ended up with a 175 and couldn't be happier, given that I'm taking the test in September.

What's even better is that 5/6 questions I missed were on a single Logic game that was really unusual and fucked me up. I had no trouble getting every question right during Blind Review, and if I had not messed up on that game I would have scored 180 with only one question off on LR1.

I was expecting a far worse result after drinking heavily last night and this being my second attmept under test conditions. But I'm super excited now knowing my test is still more than 2 months away.

Just one month of studying? Nice! You're one of the blessed ones, I hate/admire you at the same time. As I was reading, I was going to mention that a 168 for someone who took a diagnostic a month ago really isn't that bad, but then I saw the inputting error thing and then the 175, haha.

Seriously! +1 to everything Mikey said. Nice work, especially for only a month of prep. Any particular book/guide you found helpful? I am also guessing you a gifted LSAT-test taker

[Barack O'Drama]

So unfortunately I didn't get a lot done today. Maybe an hour and a half, if that. Moving sucks, but I can't wait to get it over with and be settled in. I am going to get a new desk, new chair, and make my own personal study space.

Still going through the 7Sage curriculum and almost on to week 3. I've been doing enough of it daily that I am a bit ahead. (Had it for ~2 weeks)
Still really liking it. Keeps me engaged and it is super convenient if you work/have other things to do and can just watch a video real quick.

I think tonight I am just going to get some work done, and maybe do some LSAT stuff later tonight. There's some loud event going on outside my apartment, and the bands playing are too loud to concentrate. I'm all for studying with some light noise to simulate test day conditions, but this is like studying at a damn baseball game. Non merci.

[Replitz]

None of my friends are taking this test so I'm going to share here.

Diagnostic was 163 on PT 40 exactly one month ago.

This week, I took PTs 29-31 during downtimes at work. I work on a political campaign and sometimes it's a joke so I have lots of free time for stuff like this. I scored 176, 177, 172 in that order. I was worried that I wouldn't be able to replicate those scores since I had already drilled the LGs for those tests, although the LR and RC were new. I also was taking breaks, and being a little generous with time since there were lots of distractions from my co-workers.

Today I took my first timed PT (41) under test conditions (answer sheet, printed out exam) since starting a serious study regiment. I log in a spreadsheet every session, currently at ~65 hours of prep, mostly logic games drilling on PTs 29-40.

I entered my score into 7sage and got a 168, was disappointed but not surprised. Totally tanked the first two sections, LR1 and LG but went -0 on sextion 3, LR2 and -1 on section 4, RC.

Only after starting blind review did I notice I missed entering about 10 questions into 7sage on sections one and two, and one question on section 4. I ended up with a 175 and couldn't be happier, given that I'm taking the test in September.

What's even better is that 5/6 questions I missed were on a single Logic game that was really unusual and fucked me up. I had no trouble getting every question right during Blind Review, and if I had not messed up on that game I would have scored 180 with only one question off on LR1.

I was expecting a far worse result after drinking heavily last night and this being my second attmept under test conditions. But I'm super excited now knowing my test is still more than 2 months away.

Just one month of studying? Nice! You're one of the blessed ones, I hate/admire you at the same time. As I was reading, I was going to mention that a 168 for someone who took a diagnostic a month ago really isn't that bad, but then I saw the inputting error thing and then the 175, haha.

Seriously! +1 to everything Mikey said. Nice work, especially for only a month of prep. Any particular book/guide you found helpful? I am also guessing you a gifted LSAT-test taker

I started out with the PowerScore LG bible, which was great for foundations but I found the diagramming method cumbersome. I've benefitted much more from watching 7sage's LG explanations. His diagramming method is super clean, and watching him go over each question in real time is extremely helpful.

Other than that, I read the Atlas books on RC and LR. Simple things, like having the question types explained and understanding the structure of LR arguments (look for the conclusion, find the premises, find the assumptions) have changed the way I approach the test. Before I just kind of went with my "gut" feeling, but now I can conclusively eliminate answers.

I've always had good fortune with standardized tests - I got a 35 on my ACT - but due to a shitty freshman year GPA I really need to kill this one. I'm leaving nothing up to chance!

[34iplaw]

Really long day today...four hours of LSAT class and roughly four hours of studying... diagnostic tomorrow.

I'll have a good chance to get caught up on TM homework and maybe do some other stuff this weekend.

[Burt Macklin]

i know game timing strategy is abundant out there, but did anyone have a major breakthrough with getting better with time?

Honestly, LG is my strength of the three, but for me (other than initially going through the books and getting the strategies down pat LG bible/Nova) what worked with timing was JY's Fool Proof method.

So this is my strategy:

I go through each of the chapters of the LG Cambridge 1-38, and for each game I try to get it under 6-8 minutes, if I'm over that time then I mark it as redo (even if I got a perfect score) or review (if I got at least 1 wrong) then Fool Proof the heck out of the game. I found this method really good. Also, before I start PTing I plan on doing at least 1 timed LG section so I get used to seeing a LG of different types as opposed to the same type. For example, I don't think I'll be able to take the 40's because of the time left before the test, so I will do a section a day of the LG from those tests. I will fool proof any game I'm bad on timing with or miss even one question on from those sets too. I'm hoping this will ensure success come test day!

But generally my goal for all games except the REALLY tricky ones is between 6-7 minutes.

When I do this method (not the timed LG section because I'm still on the Cambridge bundle) I find my timing is great. Also, you get the nuances and intricacies of the different games.

I hope this helps!

PY gives timing criteria / strategy for each of the LG questions. Do you base your timing off of those?

[34iplaw]

i know game timing strategy is abundant out there, but did anyone have a major breakthrough with getting better with time?

Honestly, LG is my strength of the three, but for me (other than initially going through the books and getting the strategies down pat LG bible/Nova) what worked with timing was JY's Fool Proof method.

So this is my strategy:

I go through each of the chapters of the LG Cambridge 1-38, and for each game I try to get it under 6-8 minutes, if I'm over that time then I mark it as redo (even if I got a perfect score) or review (if I got at least 1 wrong) then Fool Proof the heck out of the game. I found this method really good. Also, before I start PTing I plan on doing at least 1 timed LG section so I get used to seeing a LG of different types as opposed to the same type. For example, I don't think I'll be able to take the 40's because of the time left before the test, so I will do a section a day of the LG from those tests. I will fool proof any game I'm bad on timing with or miss even one question on from those sets too. I'm hoping this will ensure success come test day!

But generally my goal for all games except the REALLY tricky ones is between 6-7 minutes.

When I do this method (not the timed LG section because I'm still on the Cambridge bundle) I find my timing is great. Also, you get the nuances and intricacies of the different games.

I hope this helps!

PY gives timing criteria / strategy for each of the LG questions. Do you base your timing off of those?

His timing is kind of really off sometimes [probably on point 75% of the time and off base 25% of the time IMO]. I've had some games I beat his recommended time by 2-3 minutes the first time that I did them [not a master of games quite yet] and some that I just whipped through and don't understand how it would have been done much faster.

[Burt Macklin]

i know game timing strategy is abundant out there, but did anyone have a major breakthrough with getting better with time?

Honestly, LG is my strength of the three, but for me (other than initially going through the books and getting the strategies down pat LG bible/Nova) what worked with timing was JY's Fool Proof method.

So this is my strategy:

I go through each of the chapters of the LG Cambridge 1-38, and for each game I try to get it under 6-8 minutes, if I'm over that time then I mark it as redo (even if I got a perfect score) or review (if I got at least 1 wrong) then Fool Proof the heck out of the game. I found this method really good. Also, before I start PTing I plan on doing at least 1 timed LG section so I get used to seeing a LG of different types as opposed to the same type. For example, I don't think I'll be able to take the 40's because of the time left before the test, so I will do a section a day of the LG from those tests. I will fool proof any game I'm bad on timing with or miss even one question on from those sets too. I'm hoping this will ensure success come test day!

But generally my goal for all games except the REALLY tricky ones is between 6-7 minutes.

When I do this method (not the timed LG section because I'm still on the Cambridge bundle) I find my timing is great. Also, you get the nuances and intricacies of the different games.

I hope this helps!

PY gives timing criteria / strategy for each of the LG questions. Do you base your timing off of those?

His timing is kind of really off sometimes [probably on point 75% of the time and off base 25% of the time IMO]. I've had some games I beat his recommended time by 2-3 minutes the first time that I did them [not a master of games quite yet] and some that I just whipped through and don't understand how it would have been done much faster.

IDK if its available for all questions, or even for free accounts, but there are videos of other users solving the questions with JY talking over their strategies. I found those to be pretty useful as they show users strategy and timing.

[Alexandros]

179 on PT 32. Positive reinforcement FTW! hopefully that'll lessen the blow on the, idk, 136 I'll get on an actual PT tomorrow. (I'm working on lowering my expectations here y'all) But still was -4 so ergh -> -2 on (new) RC section, (and timing was awful) -2 on LR where I'd seen a few of the questions.

I'm definitely going to start doing these PTs more often. I'm noticing I have an attention span of a fruit-fly, also tend to get nervous, etc. Hopefully with more practice that will subside. I might try things like shooting for 30 min a section on repeats or doing 6 sections, I dunno.

[Replitz]

179 on PT 32. Positive reinforcement FTW! hopefully that'll lessen the blow on the, idk, 136 I'll get on an actual PT tomorrow. (I'm working on lowering my expectations here y'all) But still was -4 so ergh -> -2 on (new) RC section, (and timing was awful) -2 on LR where I'd seen a few of the questions.

I'm definitely going to start doing these PTs more often. I'm noticing I have an attention span of a fruit-fly, also tend to get nervous, etc. Hopefully with more practice that will subside. I might try things like shooting for 30 min a section on repeats or doing 6 sections, I dunno.

Did you time yourself for the 179? What do you mean "actual" pt tomorrow?